The View from Right Field

"Policy, what policy? We don't need a policy. We're against Bush. That's our policy." - 2007

Last year I posted a series of items called "What, what policy?" This article from the Los Angeles Times shows things have not changed even though the Democrats now have a majority in both the House and the Senate (one of their excuses for not having any policy alternatives last year).

On Iraq the Democrats say we should get out. But what next? Representative Jan Schakowsky of Illinois admits, "The out of Iraq caucus really has not looked beyond ending military involvement."

When Harry Reid, Senate Majority Leader, was asked what we should do if the violence increases in Iraq after we withdrew, he said, "That’s a hypothetical. I’m not going to get into it."

In other words, the Democrats have no policy other than get out and it’s Bush’s fault. And that’s their policy.

"Policy, what policy? We don't need a policy. We're against Bush. That's our policy." – Part 5

Chuck Schumer (D, NY) explains why you should vote for the Democrats in November in this excerpt from an article by Jason Horowitz in the New York Observer:

"And when it comes to Iraq, an issue on which the Republicans are once again attempting to make the Democrats look like indecisive quislings, Mr. Schumer sees no need even to take a position.

'The average person knows: We are not commander in chief, we are not in the majority – our job is to hold Bush’s feet to the fire,' said Mr. Schumer. 'And the whole issue of Iraq will be how well George Bush is doing in Iraq, not if Democrats have a substitute plan or not.'"

Well, at least there's no doubt about Chuck Schumer's policy. He's against Bush. That's his policy.

"Policy, what policy? We don't need a policy. We're against Bush. That's our policy." – Part 4

Thanks to Betsy Newmark for spotlighting this response by Rahm Emanuel on the Democratic plan for Iraq (quoted from this weekend's "The Journal Editorial Report" on FOX):

"[Paul] Gigot: Do you personally favor a set withdrawal date?

Emanuel: No. What I favor is what I just said, is 2006 is going to be the year of Iraqi sovereignty and 2007's going to be the year of America redeployment. Now, whether that's six months, eight months – we're not going to say – or whether that's 12 months in all of 2007. I'm not going to say that, that's for the generals. But set some guidelines that have us clearly on a path. ...

Gigot: But we are there now and have to make a decision what we want to do, and I guess what the American people want to know is if the House Democrats are elected, are they going to call for an immediate withdrawal of American troops?

Emanuel: House Democrats are going to provide – as the Senate Democrats have – as senator both Levin and Sen. Biden, is what is a path to victory that says 2006 is the year of Iraqi sovereignty and 2007 is the year that America looks at its redeployment from Iraq into the region, so we have a rapid-deployment force that protects Iraq without being the only force there."

Huh? So we will leave, but only the generals know when. We will protect Iraq, but we do not know how or from where. Well, at least one thing is clear: They’re against Bush, and that's their policy.

"Policy, what policy? We don't need a policy. We're against Bush. That's our policy." – Part 3

Thanks to James Taranto of "Best of the Web Today" for spotlighting this article about House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi from yesterday’s The Hill:

"‘What we have to do is define ourselves so that Republicans do not define us,’ Pelosi said. ...

She outlined three areas where Democrats would seek to differentiate themselves from Republicans: integrity, civility and accountability. ...

‘These are not full-blown initiatives,’ she cautioned. ...

‘I’m even hard put to say what our agenda will be when we win ... .’"

Oh well, at least they’re against Bush.

"Policy, what policy? We don't need a policy. We're against Bush. That's our policy." - Part 2

The Washington Post reported last Sunday (May 7, 2006):

"House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) said ... a Democratic House would launch a series of investigations of the Bush administration, beginning with the White House's first-term energy task force and probably including the use of intelligence in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq. Pelosi denied Republican allegations that a Democratic House would move quickly to impeach President Bush. But, she said of the planned investigations, 'You never know where it leads to.'"

'

“Policy, what policy? We don’t need a policy. We’re against Bush. That’s our policy.”

In the first of what may be a continuing series as the campaign unfolds, I bring you this quote from Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D. Nev.) upon the release of the annual report of the Social Security trustees (as reported in today’s Chicago Tribune), a report which projects the system to be insolvent by 2040 (and, obviously, in trouble long before that):

   

"[The report] confirms that, despite White House scare tactics, Social Security remains sound for decades to come. The real threat to Social Security comes from Republicans, most of whom support and voted for privatizing Social Security."